effected. The invention was pirated, and the bill of costs incurred in the short space of four years amounts to between five and six thousand pounds.

The more recent patent of the late Mr. Muntz for his yellow metal sheathing for ships is another case in point. It was found by Sir H. Davy that the oxidation and wear of copper sheathing might be stopped by establishing an electric action between certain metals. This was one of those splendid inventions which fail unexpectedly in practice. It was found that when the corrosion of the metal was prevented, the accumulation of seaweed and barnacles increased to such a degree that it more than neutralised the benefit of Davy's discovery. Mr. Muntz turned his attention to the subject, and alloyed copper and zinc, with a slightly larger proportion of the latter than when they are combined for making common brass. This compound was found to oxidise sufficiently to keep off incrustations from the ship's bottom, without undergoing needless waste like copper. It was also much cheaper. In sheathing a ship which required about 84 cwt. of metal, the saving in price was very great, while the durability was increased about 20 per cent. This would seem to have been a captivating invention, and yet it was proved, in a trial where the patent was in litigation, 'that merchants and shipowners were prejudiced against it as an absurd novelty."* Mr. Muntz was obliged to force his process on shipowners, first by soliciting permission to sheathe their ships for nothing, then by sheathing them below cost price, and guaranteeing them for three Indian voyages, while copper-sheathed ships could only be guaranteed for two. When at length the patentee began to find users for his invention, he found like Watt infringers as well; suits in Chancery and trials at law followed fast and furious. The Law Reports show that seven bills were filed in Chancery, six actions were brought at common law, and, to crown all, proceedings by scire facias were taken to annul the patent. Mr. Muntz eventually succeeded in maintaining his rights, but his law costs amounted to 84007.f

The cases of Watt and Muntz are fair illustrations of the ordinary course which an invention takes after it is introduced to the public, and there are two evident deductions to be drawn from them. The first is, that invalid patents are so far from being allowed to subsist to the detriment of the

*Webster's Patent Cases, vol. ii. Muntz's Case. Webster's Patent Cases, vol. ii. p. 115.

community, that the evil is the other way. There are persons found to dispute discoveries to which the claim is unexceptionable, and who dishonestly endeavour to cheat the inventor of his hard-earned reward. Sometimes the infringers are so numerous and inaccessible, that they are able to defy him, and the patentee, unable to stem the torrent, surrenders his right without a struggle. This was the case with Sir David Brewster's invention of the kaleidoscope, which he stated was pirated by cartloads.' 'Millions,' he says, were sold in London. The men who infringed the patent were Jews generally. It would have been in vain to have gone into a court of law.' Inventions which require no capital to execute are chiefly liable to be thus taken by storm.

The second point, which is shown both in the instance of the steam-engine and the metal for sheathing ships, is that, however great may be the benefit, the public will frequently pay no attention to inventions until they are forced upon them. Watt and Boulton could with difficulty get a trial for their engines, and if the shipowners had been left to look after their own interests, they would have had nothing to say to Mr. Muntz's metal. The evidence of the experienced witnesses examined before the Committee on Patents in 1857 showed that as a general rule the community must be benefited by compulsion, and how is this to be done unless the inventor is allowed to have such an interest in his invention as will make it worth his while to push it? How otherwise is he to be recompensed for the troublesome task of teaching people to change their system and improve their art or manufacture? It seldom happens that a discovery is perfect at first; it must be adapted to particular circumstances, workmen must be taught how to use it, prejudices must be conciliated; and if the patentee did not do this, the discovery, though valuable in itself, would generally be neglected for a long time or altogether lost. Nay, if the inventor volunteers to be himself the instructor, he will commonly find no one to receive his lessons if he waits for the pupils to come to him instead of going and forcing his contrivance upon them. M. Arago mentions that. M. Poncelet, an oracle in Mechanics, devised a new hydraulic machine. He did not take out a patent, but offered the machine to all who liked to make use of it, and begged that he might be consulted in the execution, lest any mistake should be committed. At the end of two years not a single per

son had availed himself of the offer. If this occurs when the inventor is one of the most eminent men in his department in Europe, what is likely to be the result when the propounder of a novelty is, as usually happens, unknown ? Apart, therefore, from the manifest justice of allowing a man to have a property in what he himself produces, it is expedient, for the sake of the public, that in the first instance an invention should be under charge of some one who is interested in preventing it from being smothered at its birth. The protection which is conferred by the patent is not only the cause, in the majority of instances, of an invention being made, but it is positively the cause why the invention is received. Thus largely is the public benefited by a system which on a superficial glance is erroneously supposed to be for the exclusive advantage of the inventor, at the expense of the rest of the world.

'Mr. Heath was the author of an invention conferring commercial profits to be reckoned by millions; he described [in his specification] the invention in one set of terms according to the facturers adopted a process chemically equivabest of his knowledge at the time. The manulent, the same in effect and result, but admitting of being described in somewhat different terms, inasmuch as it consisted in the use of the known chemical elements of the substance, instead of the substance itself. The knowledge of the use of these elements, instead of the substance, was

One of the most celebrated of the ported cases, that of Josiah Heath, is another striking instance of the effect of patents in promulgating discoveries which would otherwise remain hidden in corners. Heath took out a patent in 1839 for improving the manufacture of cast-steel, by using the so-called carburet of manganese and carbon in proper proportions. It appears from the evidence given before the Privy Council by an eminent Sheffield steel-manufacturer, that in 1839 shear-steel was sold at from 50l. to 70l. per ton, and could only be made from high-priced Russian or Swedish iron, costing from 20l. to 30%. per ton. Welding cast-steel, a still dearer product, was sold at from 70l. to 80l. per ton, and was too expensive to be employed in the Sheffield trade. When Mr. Heath had taught the makers of steel how to use his process, the same kind of steel was made from English iron worth about 10%. per ton, and could be had for from 20. to 30l. per ton. The result was a saving of 40 to 50 per cent. in the manufacture, and English iron was rendered available, where before iron imported from abroad could alone be used. There was, therefore, a two-fold national advantage-an economy was effected in English manufactures, and an English mineral product was employed in the place of foreign ore. To quote the words of the learned gentlemant who reported the case:

*

In the course of these long legal contests a verdict given in Mr. Heath's favour was set aside by the Court of Exchequer, whose decision was overruled by a still higher Court, the Court of Error, whose judgment was in turn reversed by the highest Court of the land, the House of Lords. This final decision was adverse to the opinions of the majority of the twelve Judges who were called in to assist in hearing the appeal. The fact that Mr. Heath died before the litigation had ended will perhaps create no surprise. His widow was heard by petition before the Privy Council Feb. 1, 1853; and though the old opponents tried again to impeach the validity of the patent for want of novelty, an extension of the patent for seven years was obtained. The petition of the widow stated that the legal proceedings had subjected her husband to great expense with barely any return, and to an anxiety which had shortened his life. He had only received 100l. or 2004. for the use of an invention by which Sheffield alone had realised millions.

The most extraordinary part of the statement has yet to be made. In August, 1853, Mrs. Heath brought an action against an infringer. It was tried by Mr. Justice Erle, and then, for the first time, credible evidence was given that the invention was not new at the date of the patent in 1839. Several steel-manufacturers were called as witnesses, two of whom, father

and son, stated that they had employed the process in their extensive business in Derbyshire as early as 1824; the son averred that it was a secret every one knew.* Yet, this most profitable discovery, used commonly in the Derbyshire steel-worksa secret every one there knew-remained unpropagated, and did not cross the neighbouring borders of Yorkshire until 1839. Then it was made known by Mr. Heath, because, having taken out a patent for what he no doubt independently discovered, it became his interest to take great trouble in teaching the men of Sheffield how to apply it, and to overcome the inevitable opposition of prejudice. If Mr. Heath had not patented his discovery, it seems clear that Sheffield would never have heard of the good things that had for years and years been done in Derbyshire. It must be confessed that the witness who swore that he had made steel by Heath's process since 1824, also swore that he had never heard of Heath's patent until 1850! and yet the hot contest that had been going on between all Sheffield and the poor patentee for ten years ought to have made some noise in the steel world. In the circumstance of litigation this case is no exceptional example of the hardships which are undergone by patentees, though some are fortunate enough to be successful in the end. It is never, however, at the expense of the public.

The position of patentees, with regard to the means of protecting their rights, unfortunately still remains as it was under the old law, and it would be well for them if improvements could be introduced into that branch of the system as beneficial as those which have been effected in the method of obtaining the grant itself. Under the old law, as we have seen, the applicant for letters patent was compelled to pay black mail in numerous distinct offices, at a cost of between 3001. and 400l. in fees, and often as much more in incidental expenses. Under the new law he has merely to deposit his application in the Great Seal Office in Chancery Lane, and for the payment of 51. he obtains, if his papers are drawn up with clearness, a provisional protection of his project for six months. This is a great boon to the poor inventor, who, by scraping together a hundred shillings, is able to acquire a property in his invention for at least half a year, which gives him time to test and complete his work, without fear

*Heath v. Smith, Webster's Patent Cases, vol. ii. p. 264.

of its being filched from him. He need no longer place himself at the mercy of the first rich patron to whom he may be forced to apply. He possesses a recognized property, and can treat on fairer terms with the capitalist who may be willing to advance him funds.

Provided the scheme steers clear of the claims of prior patentees who might otherwise oppose the demand, letters patent are granted any time during the term of the provisional protection, on payment of 201 They confer the usual rights for fourteen years, except that the patent will become void at the end of three years, unless a 50%. fee be paid; and again at the end of seven years, unless a further fee of 100l. be paid. These periodical disbursements need not of course be made unless the patent should prove of sufficient value, and thus patents that are worthless are cleared away, and leave the field open to further invention.

Besides enabling the inventor to obtain easily and cheaply a legal title to his own invention, the Patent Law Amendment Act empowered the Commissioners to reorganize the office branch of this department. The instructions are not very distinct or comprehensive, but they have been applied in a manner which shows how much may be done when the authorities take an enlarged view of their duties, instead of dronishly allowing the machinery of their department to grind along in the grooves of routine. Yearly reports are published by the Commissioners, and that for 1853 gives an account of the effects of the improved system :

'The number of applications for provisional protection recorded within the fifteen months from the 1st October, 1852, to the 31st Decempassed thereon, all having become due on the ber, 1853, was 4256; the number of patents 30th June last, was 3099; and the number of applications, lapsed or forfeited, the applicants having neglected to proceed for their patents within the six months of provisional protection, was 1157.

'The number of applications recorded within the first three months of the operation of the

Act was 1211.

'The number of applications recorded within the year 1853 was 3045.'

The large comparative demand for patents during the first three months of the new system, was owing to the fact that many inventions had been purposely held back. The returns of the applications from different counties, from October, 1852, to December, 1853, inclusive, are highly significant :

The first efforts of the Commissioners were directed towards vivifying the stores of information entombed in chapels or crammed to suffocation in the Petty Bag, by introducing the printing press. This was a startling innovation. Never since patents were first granted had there been any attempt to give publicity to their mouldering rolls. Even a pencil note by a visitor was a transgression of the rules. If memorandums had been permitted to be made fewer office copies of the documents would have been required, and these were paid for by the letter, and cost scores of pounds, where now they may be purchased for half so many pence. The Commissioners began by printing the new patents:

All the specifications,' says the Report of 1853, filed in the office from October 1st, 1852, to 30th June, 1853, 3099 in number, have been printed and published, together with lithographed outline copies of the drawings accompanying the same, and these are sold to the public either separately, or in the series for the year, at the

cost price of the printing and paper. The price of a specification of the average length of letterpress and drawings is 8d. Each specification is printed and published within three weeks of its deposit in the office.'

It was in this department that fears were entertained of a speedy dead lock. It was prognosticated that no public office could continue to print the great influx of matter which might be expected constantly to increase. It would tax, it was said, the utmost powers of the best organised private establishment, pushed on by a commercial stimulus, to execute such a task. But, it seems that even at the end of the first the Patent office, thanks to the ability and untiring zeal of its superintendent, Mr. Woodcroft, had not only disposed of the current work, but was clearing off arrears. It was resolved to print every patent that existed from the earliest date, and by the end of 1853 this great undertaking was in rapid progress.

year,

'The whole series of specifications of patents for reaping-machines, and the drawings accompanying the same, from the first enrolled, 4th July, 1799, to the present time, have been printed and published, and are sold at the cost price of the printing and paper, either separately or altogether, with an appendix, in one volume. The appendix, compiled by Mr. Woodcroft from a great variety of authorities and works, describes the instruments for reaping grain published and in use from the earliest period to the present time.

'The whole series of specifications of patents for fire-arms, cannon, shot, shells, cartridges, weapons, accoutrements, and the machinery for their manufacture, and the drawings accompanying the same, from the earliest record, 15th May, 1718, to the present time, have been printis in preparation and will shortly be published. ed and published in like manner. An appendix

'The Secretary of State for the Home Department has required the publication of the old specifications of patents for the consumption of smoke in furnaces, and for the making of drainage tiles applicable to sewerage; and the Board of Admiralty has required the publication of in propelling ships; these three subjects are now the specifications of patents for improvements in preparation.'-Report 1853, p. 5.

The current of invention steadily sets in the direction in which it is urged by passing events, as is proved by the swelling number of applications for patents which relate to the engrossing subject of the hour. When the war with Russia broke out, the Patent Office was inundated with belligerent projects. No less than 600 patents have been since granted for military inventions, while the total of all that had ever been granted before was only 300.